DNRTFA but teachers should explain that this is our best theory and while we cannot prove it as an absolute certainty there is a hell of a lot more evidence for it that anything else including creationism.

Evolution and faith can be compatible, as long as faith is willing to abandon literal interpretations of scripture.

Therein lies the main problem, IMHO. Evolution is only incompatible with religion when you insist on interpreting the bible literally. (Which hardly any Christian sect actually does, btw...I don't care what they tell you.) This is only a wedge issue for political reasons. Christians are easier to herd and manage when they feel threatened and embattled over some moral panic crisis.

For those literal bible interpreters I like to ask them about the flood and how there was enough food for all the animals to re-populate considering many of them are natural predators of each other. I know there are a lot of components missing from my argument (like plants and trees, how did they come back?)

However in college we had to argue a topic in philosophy class and creation vs evolution was the one my group got. So we brought in a chemical engineer who was also a young earth creationist and asked that question....and stumped him. He had no idea how to answer it.

You can say what my ethology (animal behavior) professor said, to some Creationist asshat that obviously took the class so he could raise his hand on the first day, and question evolutionary theory outright. Another attention-whore whose beliefs require that he make a martyr [asshole] out of himself to prove his faith.

"The ideas presented in this course regarding the development of both animal behavior and physiology will be based on the theories, and whenever possible, evidence that is currently accepted by the majority of scientists in the biological fields. Development of traits in subsequent generations is considered critical to this process. If you have a problem accepting this theory, especially as it pertains to the material presented in this course, then this may not be the course for you."

I was tempted to raise my hand and demand that the professor not teach any of that "Earth revolving around the Sun crap, either", but I think he proved his point. In any case, that ignorant asshat didn't show up for the rest of the semester, so I guess he had done enough to get into heaven.

I don't think telling students they're morons is the answer. They're farking students. I can give students a break, because they are in the process of learning not just about concrete things, but about ways of thinking and how to understand the world. There should be some appreciation for that when talking to students in a way that will help them to learn to think critically.

Once you're an adult, however, you're on your own.

/Once gave a speech defending creationism in high school, but gave up on the whole Christian thing in college because I became more rigorous with the answers I was given in regards to Christian beliefs.

I grew up in a suburb in Connecticut. Among those in my class of 350 or so, there were Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and non-religious. There might have been some that belonged to other groups, but it didn't really matter all that much what group you belonged to. Out of those 350 or so teenagers I graduated with, I am fairly convinced that all 350 believed that humans evolved over a long period of time, and I am also fairly convinced that all 350 could tell you that the Earth was more than 6,000 years old. Since then, I've lived in Virginia, Tennessee and now Utah. So I know that creationists actually exist, but I never experienced this as a teenager. The idea that someone in my teenage peer group would have actually denied evolution boggles my mind.

"Even when bolstered by modern genetics, evolutionary theory does not explain why life emerged on Earth more than 3 billion years ago, or whether life was highly probable, even inevitable, or a once in a universe fluke."

It pisses me the hell off when people bring this up. Evolutionary theory does not even attempt to explain the origins of life. That is not why the theory was developed. Its like saying that you don't believe in gravity because it doesn't explain how pop-rocks work.

Happy Hours:DNRTFA but teachers should explain that this is our best theory and while we cannot prove it as an absolute certainty there is a hell of a lot more evidence for it that anything else including creationism.

You are now free to go to church on Sunday.

Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. It's like gravity, there is no doubt that it exists.

The "theory" part of the theory of evolution is the same as the "theory" part of gravity, it deals with the how evolution works, not whether it exists or not.

The theory of gravity is the same, it attempts to explain how gravity works, that is exists is not a question.

Currently the most widely accepted theory of gravity is...anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Three Crooked Squirrels:I grew up in a suburb in Connecticut. Among those in my class of 350 or so, there were Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and non-religious. There might have been some that belonged to other groups, but it didn't really matter all that much what group you belonged to. Out of those 350 or so teenagers I graduated with, I am fairly convinced that all 350 believed that humans evolved over a long period of time, and I am also fairly convinced that all 350 could tell you that the Earth was more than 6,000 years old. Since then, I've lived in Virginia, Tennessee and now Utah. So I know that creationists actually exist, but I never experienced this as a teenager. The idea that someone in my teenage peer group would have actually denied evolution boggles my mind.

It's not all that hard to understand, hardly mind-boggling. The 6000 year thing is kind of a fringe, but still, you don't get to choose who raises you and where you grow up, so you are at the mercy of the information that is provided to you. And let's not act as if there aren't societal pressures in regards to belief as well that can keep people from bothering to question, at least for a while, and an evolutionary tendency to trust your family and the people in your group. There are people who believe the earth is old and that evolution exists within small parameters, but still believe god created everything and that species don't evolve into different species. They're unfortunately close to the majority, in fact, so I'm guessing not all your 349 classmates all believed as you expect.

poorjon:"Even when bolstered by modern genetics, evolutionary theory does not explain why life emerged on Earth more than 3 billion years ago, or whether life was highly probable, even inevitable, or a once in a universe fluke."

It pisses me the hell off when people bring this up. Evolutionary theory does not even attempt to explain the origins of life. That is not why the theory was developed. Its like saying that you don't believe in gravity because it doesn't explain how pop-rocks work.

It's more like saying you don't believe in gravity because it doesn't explain the origin of matter. They aren't completely unrelated.

"Well Jimmy, this is a science class and I am going to teach science. Your grade will be based on your understanding of that science so I suggest you pay attention. Whether you believe it or not, this material will be on the test. "

If he sincerely wants to avoid questioning their beliefs, there's a pretty easy out. Explain how evolution works. Then say that it's possible that God could have created everything so that all evidence would lead to evolution without there actually having been any evolution.

/Once they've agreed to that, ask them why God would have deliberately created everything in such a way as to lead to an answer that's incorrect//Although if you've bought into the whole "Kill your son! Haha, just kidding!" story, it wouldn't be hard to imagine God as the ultimate Troll

ghall3:For those literal bible interpreters I like to ask them about the flood and how there was enough food for all the animals to re-populate considering many of them are natural predators of each other. I know there are a lot of components missing from my argument (like plants and trees, how did they come back?)

However in college we had to argue a topic in philosophy class and creation vs evolution was the one my group got. So we brought in a chemical engineer who was also a young earth creationist and asked that question....and stumped him. He had no idea how to answer it.

/CSB

Wait, so you're telling me he can believe that a 600 year old man gathered 2 of every unclean animal and 7 pairs of clean animals in the span of a year, built an ark 300 cubits x 80 cubits x 40 cubits* - by hand, at age 600 - in preparation for a 40-day deluge (complete with ground-level hotsprings bursting for another few days or weeks after that)...but how to feed them and make sure none of them eat each other is suddenly the unanswerable question?

*if a cubit is 18", we're talking total internal volume of 285,000 ft2. If it's 24", 120,000 ft2. There were 3 floors in the ark, the bottom for refuse. You do the math on how that works.

Nice.If this is high school we're talking about, the answer is simple."Class, we will be learning about Darwinian evolution. You can choose to believe or disbelieve as you like, but you will be expected to know the theory. You are free to hedge all answers on the tests with an 'according to' if that makes you more comfortable. If anyone would like to discuss the merits of creationism vs evolution, I would be happy to do so outside of class, with your parents' permission. If you'd like to discuss intelligent design, you'll receive an F."

It's okay if they doubt it coming in. Don't just call them a moran. These are students and reading their responses tells me that some of them were never given a thorough lesson of Darwinism and evolution from anyone except a religious nay-sayer.

CSB: Grew up with uber christian people and kids who went to bible college. One girl said their school teaches evolution and its theories including the ones where evolution makes a sudden change rather than slow, multi-millennial changes. Students went from a preconceived notion that Darwin is full of it to understanding that their faith and evolution can co-exist. That's what you need. Not auto-shunning them because of what they were taught as kids.

Barfmaker:Happy Hours: DNRTFA but teachers should explain that this is our best theory and while we cannot prove it as an absolute certainty there is a hell of a lot more evidence for it that anything else including creationism.

You are now free to go to church on Sunday.

Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. It's like gravity, there is no doubt that it exists.

The "theory" part of the theory of evolution is the same as the "theory" part of gravity, it deals with the how evolution works, not whether it exists or not.

The theory of gravity is the same, it attempts to explain how gravity works, that is exists is not a question.

Currently the most widely accepted theory of gravity is...anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Dr Dreidel:Wait, so you're telling me he can believe that a 600 year old man gathered 2 of every unclean animal and 7 pairs of clean animals in the span of a year, built an ark 300 cubits x 80 cubits x 40 cubits* - by hand, at age 600 - in preparation for a 40-day deluge (complete with ground-level hotsprings bursting for another few days or weeks after that)...but how to feed them and make sure none of them eat each other is suddenly the unanswerable question?

*if a cubit is 18", we're talking total internal volume of 285,000 ft2. If it's 24", 120,000 ft2. There were 3 floors in the ark, the bottom for refuse. You do the math on how that works.

Hey, I didn't say it made sense. It's just that's the part that stumped him. Clearly since we started from a position of "he believes the earth is 6000yrs old, there were bound to be some inconsistencies in his beliefs" Interestingly, he also believed that light slows down as it move through space

The sad part is in our group of 6 only 2 of us were on the side of evolution, they wanted to argue for creationism against someone who doubted it. Luckily I convinced them that since we would have no real evidence for creation it would be tough to get a good grade.

Bhruic:If he sincerely wants to avoid questioning their beliefs, there's a pretty easy out. Explain how evolution works. Then say that it's possible that God could have created everything so that all evidence would lead to evolution without there actually having been any evolution.

/Once they've agreed to that, ask them why God would have deliberately created everything in such a way as to lead to an answer that's incorrect//Although if you've bought into the whole "Kill your son! Haha, just kidding!" story, it wouldn't be hard to imagine God as the ultimate Troll

Creationists are willfully ignorant and dishonest. They deny that physical observations support a conclusion of evolution, though they themselves have not actually made any physical observations to justify such a claim.

Classes like these should be prefaced with a singular Socratic question asked by the prof; "If you 'choose' to take a class on Religion, and reply to every question and discussion that the entire premise before you is the sum of a lying falsehood, would you by any means expect to gain a passing grade, or be surprised if you didn't? Think for a moment on where you chose to sit today before you answer."

Dimensio:Creationists are willfully ignorant and dishonest. They deny that physical observations support a conclusion of evolution, though they themselves have not actually made any physical observations to justify such a claim.

When they can answer any inaccuracies with their beliefs and precepts with, "because an infinitely powerful being that there is no evidence of willed it to be that way", there's really no point in treating these people like adults.

They aren't morons, but they have been deceived from an early age. I was reading excerpts from an elementary level textbook from the Louisiana public school system the other day. It was basically saying that scientists believed in evolution in spite of obvious evidence to the contrary and that they were essentially stupid for not being able to see it. Elementary school students aren't going to be going to Wikipedia and then clicking on the citations section. They are going to believe what their school books tell them, especially when they go home and to church and hear the exact same thing. So they grow up believing that scientists are stupid and that their data can be trumped by common sense. It is the same system of thought that makes them 100% confident that their gut level reactions trump Nate Silver's mountains of statistical evidence and theory.

I'm not saying it's not fact but it seems to me if people were confident in evolution it would be the laws of evolution not still a theory.Science and religion are not opposed science is just too young to understand. I heard this quote somewhere and I believe it will eventually be a truism

ghall3:Dr Dreidel: Wait, so you're telling me he can believe that a 600 year old man gathered 2 of every unclean animal and 7 pairs of clean animals in the span of a year, built an ark 300 cubits x 80 cubits x 40 cubits* - by hand, at age 600 - in preparation for a 40-day deluge (complete with ground-level hotsprings bursting for another few days or weeks after that)...but how to feed them and make sure none of them eat each other is suddenly the unanswerable question?

*if a cubit is 18", we're talking total internal volume of 285,000 ft2. If it's 24", 120,000 ft2. There were 3 floors in the ark, the bottom for refuse. You do the math on how that works.

Hey, I didn't say it made sense. It's just that's the part that stumped him. Clearly since we started from a position of "he believes the earth is 6000yrs old, there were bound to be some inconsistencies in his beliefs" Interestingly, he also believed that light slows down as it move through space

The sad part is in our group of 6 only 2 of us were on the side of evolution, they wanted to argue for creationism against someone who doubted it. Luckily I convinced them that since we would have no real evidence for creation it would be tough to get a good grade.

/They still didn't see how they were wrong though

Having grown up Orthodox Jewish, there are "extra-textual" answers - traditional supplemental stories (collectively termed "midrash" [from the Hebrew for "to explain in depth"]) that address some very obvious questions.

In the Noah/ark story, most of it is "a miracle". Animals didn't eat each other because god tells them not to, Noah's food stores were enough to feed the 9 people and thousands of animals (though they got very little sleep that year - one story has Noah biatching about having to work so hard, so god has a lion kick him in the shins [YA RLY] to remind him that he could very easily have it worse), that god gave Noah a younger man's strength (if you've ever seen "Two By Two", this is the story behind the song "I Feel Like I'm 90 Again") to help him build the ark, that animals willingly came to the ark...

// learned all about evolution in religious school// also how the Earth was 4.5B years old, and the universe over 3x that age

Funbags:When they can answer any inaccuracies with their beliefs and precepts with, "because an infinitely powerful being that there is no evidence of willed it to be that way", there's really no point in treating these people like adults.

Once you have eliminated everything that is impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.